Takahashi FC-100D v SkyWatcher ED120

[Moonshane]

I am hoping there's nothing between them Derek, mainly as I have a 120mm Equinox and cannot afford a Tak ?

[DRT]

6 minutes ago, 25585 said:

How do the 2 focusers compare, Featherlite v Tak + micro?  

 

1 hour ago, DRT said:

Ok, but we’re not going to talk about focusers in case you two get a bit rowdy ?

?

[Stu]

13 minutes ago, DRT said:

“three”?

i might have one or two more than that but whose counting ?

I was just discussing this little sub group

 

[Pig]

Three reviews to look forward to ? but by the sounds of it the trilogy will be quite some time in the making ?????? Lord of the refraction rings springs to mind ???????

Edited July 4, 2018 by Pig

[JohnSadlerAstro]

39 minutes ago, Stu said:

They look great, you will have three amazing scopes so if you don't have to, no reason not to keep it

I'm afraid that hint isn't very subtle. @Stu Methinks someone wants to increase their amazing scopes collection...…  

Of course, I eschew such things. ?

P.S. Or are you saying you don't want to? Too many negatives in that sentence. You need to eschew them please.

Johns

Edited July 4, 2018 by JohnSadlerAstro

[John]

If your seeing is up to it, Jovian features such as festoons are quite a good test. If you are prepared to wait for Saturn, I've yet to see Enceladus with 100mm wheras the 120 has done it plus the Crepe ring can be tough at these apertures.

Splitting Antares (if you have the horizon and seeing for it ?) will really test the scopes as well. Zeta Hercules is well placed.

I guess what you want to compare is the acuity of the scopes, quality of the star image, CA control and any SA present, that sort of thing. The additonal 20mm should make fainter stars and DSO's easier so thats not such an issue perhaps ?

 

[DRT]

5 minutes ago, John said:

If your seeing is up to it, Jovian features such as festoons are quite a good test. If you are prepared to wait for Saturn, I've yet to see Enceladus with 100mm wheras the 120 has done it plus the Crepe ring can be tough at these apertures.

Splitting Antares (if you have the horizon and seeing for it ?) will really test the scopes as well. Zeta Hercules is well placed.

I guess what you want to compare is the acuity of the scopes, quality of the star image, CA control and any SA present, that sort of thing. The additonal 20mm should make fainter stars and DSO's easier so thats not such an issue perhaps ?

 

Unfortunately Saturn currently tracks just below my neighbour's roof line ?

I'll try some straight up stuff - M13 perhaps? 

[Mark at Beaufort]

I will be interested in the comparison between the two scopes - both look fantastic Derek. If its clear over the next few nights have a look at Mu Librae very close to Jupiter at the moment. It has a separation of 1.9" so a great test with the scopes side by side.

[DRT]

20 minutes ago, Mark at Beaufort said:

I will be interested in the comparison between the two scopes - both look fantastic Derek. If its clear over the next few nights have a look at Mu Librae very close to Jupiter at the moment. It has a separation of 1.9" so a great test with the scopes side by side.

Thanks, Mark - that looks pretty easy to find so I will have a go this evening and report back.

[John]

Jupiter seems nice and steady here ATM. Hope it is similar for you Derek

[DRT]

1 hour ago, John said:

Jupiter seems nice and steady here ATM. Hope it is similar for you Derek

It's like a wobbly orange from here, John

I had a look at the Ring Nebula, which looked very similar in both scopes but was only a faint round smudge.

I would probably be better setting an alarm and having a look at the early morning Moon.

 

[Stu]

3 minutes ago, DRT said:

It's like a wobbly orange from here, John

I had a look at the Ring Nebula, which looked very similar in both scopes but was only a faint round smudge.

I would probably be better setting an alarm and having a look at the early morning Moon.

 

Tried any doubles Derek? Pi Aquilae is worth a go.

[DRT]

It’s now cloudy ?

[John]

7 hours ago, DRT said:

It’s now cloudy ?

Same happened here Derek - I thought of you and the 2 scopes when the clouds came over last night 

Hopefully another clear night will present itself very soon.

[Stu]

11 hours ago, JohnSadlerAstro said:

I'm afraid that hint isn't very subtle. @Stu Methinks someone wants to increase their amazing scopes collection...…  

Of course, I eschew such things. ?

P.S. Or are you saying you don't want to? Too many negatives in that sentence. You need to eschew them please.

Johns

No, not in the market for one at the moment. If I remember correctly I used to own Derek’s scope anyway

[Highburymark]

I'd presume the 120 would show globulars/galaxies better, while the FC's slightly better control of CA might edge it on bright stars and open clusters? Maybe the SW would show a bit more lunar detail - small craters for example - but the Tak would be slightly sharper. Tak also better in poorer seeing conditions?

 

 

 

 

[dweller25]

@DRT

@Stu

@John

Old thread, but what was the outcome ? 🙂

[mikeDnight]

 

 

[paulastro]

I'd go for the 120ED every time, and I'm totally unbiased.  Anyway, a four inch top of  the range scope may give the 120ED a little competition, but never a miserly 3.9 inch refractor 😀.

[Stu]

Well, I still have an FC100DC, my most used scope (throughout my 20 years observing), and don’t have another 120ED. Take from that what you will.

My feelings were always that I never felt I was missing out on any detail with the Tak, and the sheer useability and grab and go nature makes it so much easier to use regularly that it’s a no brainer for me. If I were at a darker site and did more deep sky observing I may think differently, although would use the Mewlon more for that.

For the record, if I had the space and spare cash I would probably still want to have a 120ED around because I do think they are great scopes.

[paulastro]

10 minutes ago, Stu said:

Well, I still have an FC100DC, my most used scope (throughout my 20 years observing), and don’t have another 120ED. Take from that what you will.

My feelings were always that I never felt I was missing out on any detail with the Tak, and the sheer useability and grab and go nature makes it so much easier to use regularly that it’s a no brainer for me. If I were at a darker site and did more deep sky observing I may think differently, although would use the Mewlon more for that.

For the record, if I had the space and spare cash I would probably still want to have a 120ED around because I do think they are great scopes.

 I must confess Stu, I'm still looking forward to trying out mikeDnight's DZ when lockdown allows - that is if Mike will still let me if he reads my last post!  😄

[mikeDnight]

1 hour ago, paulastro said:

I'd go for the 120ED every time, and I'm totally unbiased.  Anyway, a four inch top of  the range scope may give the 120ED a little competition, but never a miserly 3.9 inch refractor 😀.

For a trained psychologist Paul, you seem to have an unhealthy obsession with size! 

[paulastro]

Yes that's true Mike, telescopes, brain size - all sorts of things 😄

[John]

I keep intending to post something on this, having owned both the Tak FC100-DL and a Skywatcher ED120 for 4 years now.

At some point I am intending to downsize my equipment stocks but I will find it very difficult to pick which of these scopes stays and which goes

 

 

 

[mikeDnight]

Sorry Paul, I couldn't find a DZ star image to compare, so you'll need to rough it with this one from a TSA (sorry JeremyS).    I did find a star image of a 120ED for comparison. As you can see the Tak is perfection, however the 120ED as well as being colourful, shows some spherical aberration. It's interesting the 120ED doesn't show an in focus star image for comparison. 

 

 

Edited June 15, 2020 by mikeDnight